I mean, look at the number of contributions to the 5G standards by company in this document, and compare the positions of Huawei, Qualcomm and Cisco: https://www.iplytics.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Who-Lead... (page 9).
What are they supposed to steal there? They literally are defining what 5G is.
note: I was involved in early tech standardization on 3GPP for many years. yes Huawei contributes a lot. That doesn't mean they also don't steal your shit. They do it because there literally is no way to hold them accountable. You just got to make sure you don't travel to a country that may extradite you to the US. And by the way they are _not_ the leader in 5G. This is constantly parroted propaganda. You can get the same "mature" Tech for 5G from Ericsson, Nokia ... yes Huawei might have more patents but you can only sell what the standard supports in terms of interoperability, and so the constant claim that the only 5G player is Huawei is plain wrong.
[1] obviously we didn't use github to manage our source code.
I suspect this happens in other countries too, but I think elsewhere people make an effort to be less obvious about it. I get the impression copy paste programming isn't as looked down upon here as it is in the west.
I mean, in Europe salespeople routinely take customer contact-lists with them whenever they move, everybody knows it. Developers do the equivalent stuff in their field. Asians are just a bit more blunt about it, because they have less to lose. Plenty of Europeans did the same sort of thing when moving to the US in 18th/19th century - I call it "hungry makes right".
https://www.theverge.com/2020/3/19/21187651/anthony-levandow...
Imaginary property only worked when all jurisdictions agreed to follow the same rules, and could enforce these rules onto individual actors. Obviously China isn't playing by these rules and has no desire to play by these rules, regardless of any lip service paid. So we can either adjust our own philosophies to better match how the real world operates. Or we can continue trying to force our rules on everyone else, which will end catastrophically when reality finally does catch up.
Countries always act in what they perceive to be their best interests.
Ergo, there will always be tension over rules that further those interests and rules that act counter to them.
Pharma patents have historically been a major example. Disempowering smaller countries in their negotiations with pharmaceutical companies (via mandatory IP enforcement) tilts the playing field in favor of corporations headquartered in first world countries.
So, even in the most lawful of times (2000s?), it's a constantly shifting landscape.
While China may have ignored more rules than most, the existing rules certainly didn't favor them, and they believed they had the power to ignore them.
We'll see where that ends up.
Yet all of this seems completely unknown in the West, outside of the legal/business community that actually engages with the Chinese IP system. The same comments about there being no IP enforcement in China are made over and over again, completely disregarding the massive changes that have occurred.
You can argue that Ericsson and Nokia are equals to Huawei in 5G technology. But Huawei are by far the leaders in 5G equipment sales.
This is the problem with China, they unashamedly want to eat the hand that feeds them. Even in China there’s a saying, somethink like “Don’t wake up the sleepy giant” in reference to the US’ lax policy in dealing with this. They, the Chinese themselves, think that the US is dumb for letting them get away with so much.
In 2019, Huawei had the 5th largest R&D budget of any company in the world. Its R&D budget was larger than that of Apple.[1]
> They, the Chinese themselves, think that the US is dumb for letting them get away with so much.
What are you basing this on? It might surprise you to know that China has established dozens of specialized IP courts since 2014, which now handle hundreds of thousands of cases per year. What you're saying sounds like pure prejudice, born out of a lack of knowledge.
1. https://www.caixinglobal.com/2019-01-11/chart-of-the-day-hua...
Friendships among nations is a very relative term.
What you describe is just less attempts by chinese to cover up their tracks, since it doesn't matter that much now.
Right?
I think there are certain lines that aren't supposed to be crossed. You'll notice in the U.S. that Uber and Levandowski were sued by Waymo. Why? Because they stole source code. If "everybody is doing it" surely Waymo would just chalk it up to business as usual right?
I guess you could say, well in the U.S. we enforce certain standards blah blah... exactly. There are certain standards. You can play dirty within certain limits. The U.S. doesn't have a national policy of having companies steal stuff from trading partners. If I, as a U.S. citizen, started hacking into Chinese companies and stealing their source code, set up an operation to call and scam old Chinese ladies out of their life savings, or any of that I'd be in serious shit. In China it's business as usual because the CCP has an unofficial policy of "steal as much as possible and fuck em".
I really don't like when people try and normalize CCP actions or equate their actions with the U.S. or Europe for that matter. It's nonsense and self-hating.
It really depends on how much valuable stuff you got
No mate, it was a rip-off.
All nations have way too many laws. You will be in violation of one of them. So the only thing the Chinese or US government needs to do is pick a US or Chinese citizen, and then hold up the probably 10 laws that he/she is violating. It's impossible to live somewhere and be law abiding while simultaneously not knowing what all the laws are.
Let's be frank, we're not at the level of the elites in these nations who are arguing over which nation has the largest most attractive tits. On our level, and I'm talking to western and Chinese workers alike, but we're so far down the chain that we won't have people out there pulling strings for us. You don't want to be the hapless patsy sitting in US and Chinese prisons for 10 years while the elites compare dick size or whatever. To paraphrase that old adage, "They can remain irrational much longer than you can comfortably sit in prison."
I'm saying both americans and chinese should be mindful of this risk when working in the other country.
Has something changed?
Putting faith in the government officials is just a bit naive I think.
If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and sticking to the rules when posting here, we'd be grateful.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-huawei-argu...
> Was she ever extradited from Canada after being captured in Vancouver, BC?
No, it's still a giant political mess. The Canadian government wishes they had never gotten involved - they should have just let her slip. With the US and China, Canada is between a rock and a hard place.
Source on this? I certainly haven't heard the government say anything to this effect. As a Canadian I certainly do not wish we had "just let her slip". We're a country of laws. We should follow those laws, not just give in to pressure from China because they're big, mean, and scary.
Really though the crux of the matter is wether Meng is held due to a real criminality as per Canadian/US law, or is being held as a political move, and signals from both US and Canadian administration has been confusing in this regard. Some statements from US and administrations give a feeling that she's being held for political reasons.
"Several well-known Canadians, including former prime minister Jean Chrétien and former foreign minister John Manley, have suggested that Canada let Meng go or orchestrate a “prisoner exchange” with China."
From WaPo on this issue:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/extraditio...
It is embarrassing that we haven’t banned Huawei products in Canada yet.
1. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/nortel-files-for-bankruptc...
2. https://www.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSN1936265020080619
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/former-nortel-exec-warns-ag...
https://aragonresearch.com/cyber-war-flashback-remembering-t...
Chinese government hacking and Huawei hacking are one and the same as the end result is Huawei benefitting from the stolen information.
Had Nortel not been hacked they wouldn't have had to deal with their competitors ripping off their products and out manoeuvring them in their business deals.
The article I linked to cites an ex senior security advisor at Nortel stating that the hacking dated back to 2000, before the tech bubble burst.
Instead of being swept under the rug the demise of Nortel due to hacking should be a case study in why computer security needs to be given a lot more attention even if it is at the expense of convenience.
Nortel expanded massively during the dot-com bubble, and went on a nearly $20 billion acquisition spree that caused it to lose money every quarter for years, even while its stock price was driven up by unrealistic expectations. Then the dot-com bubble burst, at which point these expectations were tempered and people began worrying about Nortel's unprofitability. The stock crashed, raising capital became difficult, demand for Nortel's products (and all telecommunications hardware) plummeted, and the company had to lay off 20% of its workers. At this time, Huawei was a tiny player outside of China. Nortel's major competitor was Cisco.
In 2003, for the first time in years, Nortel finally posted a quarterly profit, but then came under investigation from the SEC over suspicions that it was fudging its numbers (specifically, the accusation was that executives shifted revenue in time in order to meet targets that earned them bonuses). The SEC charged top Nortel executives with fraud, and the case was eventually settled, but Nortel had to change out its top management. Nortel was also sued by shareholders, to whom it had to pay billions of dollars in a settlement. There were layoffs and downsizing throughout this entire period.
To look at that history, and then to claim that hacking that might have helped one of Nortel's several competitors (and not even the largest, by a long shot) is the reason for Nortel's demise just seems completely out of left field to me. To be honest, it sounds like a batter yelling at the ump about being distracted by a fan after he strikes out 0-3.
Here is a quote from one of the articles I linked: >Nortel was once one of the dominant telecom providers globally, but in early 2004, Huawei was caught stealing trade secrets from Nortel. This was proven by Nortel security expert Brian Shields. However, Nortel management had a hand in their own eventual downfall when it outsourced manufacturing to Huawei in the ’90s.
>In the hack, Huawei gained credentials of Nortel executives, including CEO Frank Dunn and Brian McFadden. It then simply stole documents that contained the future product and marketing plans of Nortel.
>The hack went even further than usernames and passwords. It has never been proven, but U.S. sources discovered that it was most likely Huawei that used sophisticated malware to record nearly every phone call that Frank Dunn made. After all of this, Huawei grew and Nortel faded, eventually going bankrupt.
All of the history of some mismanagement or funny accounting means nothing to me. Nortel had a large portfolio of IP that was stolen by China and ended up in the hands of Huawei and then the details of all of the deals they were trying to make to sell equipment were also stolen and used to out manoeuvre them, driving losses and unprofitability.
History has shown us and it keeps showing us principles are great as long as they don't get in the way of business.
For example why was it that Trudeau decided to "just let [it] slip" when it came to the SNC-Lavalin corruption investigation?
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/03/06/americas/canada-politics-...
I have idea if the claims against Huawei are true (many of these details seem to be kept secret) and my suspicion would be they may well have been involved in some sort of industrial espionage.
I'm also sure many companies and countries around the world are also actively engaged in all sorts of espionage.
However, the fact a government has been shown to easily bend it's own laws for the sake of business also means Huawei's claim this is a politically motivated attack can't be so easily dismissed.
I'm basing this on the government's paralysis in this case.
> We're a country of laws.
Canada's system of laws is being abused by the Trump administration, which has made no secret of its desire to use Meng Wanzhou as a bargaining chip in the trade war. Allowing the Canadian extradition treaty with the US to be abused for political ends was not wise. There were smarter ways to deal with the request. Hong Kong's reaction to the US extradition request for Snowden (please resubmit the paperwork while we let him fly out of our jurisdiction) would have been a good model to follow.
> We should follow those laws, not just give in to pressure from China because they're big, mean, and scary.
The possible US reaction to not extraditing Meng Wanzhou would be just as - if not more - scary. Canada is extremely dependent on trade with the US. That's why the government arrested Meng Wanzhou, and why it is finding it so difficult to acknowledge the obvious: that this is a politically motivated prosecution that does not fall under the terms of the extradition treaty.
What paralysis? It's moving through the court system at the court systems typical pace. (Which is slower than I would like... but that's just a general comment about our court system)
> Canada's system of laws is being abused by the Trump administration
This is primarily an argument for amending our laws in response to this case, not ignoring them in this case. Admittedly it's partially an argument that might be raised to say that the laws do not support extradition in this case, but of course at the time we detained Meng Wanzhou this was nowhere near as clear, and her lawyers are more then capable of making this argument to the court.
> The possible US reaction to not extraditing Meng Wanzhou would be just as - if not more - scary.
Indeed, and we should pay as little attention to that as we do to China's threats and retaliatory arrests. I have complete faith that our courts are paying as little attention to it.
Next you'll be telling us that a police officer would never lie on the stand.
Not requiring trust is the entire reason why we have such a public court process.
I suspect we have very different opinions on how frequently police lie on the stand.
> This is primarily an argument for amending our laws in response to this case, not ignoring them in this case.
The political exception to extradition quite obviously applies here. This is a standard clause in extradition treaties. The thing is, the Canadian government is afraid to use this clause for political reasons - fear of retaliation from the Trump administration.
Refusing to sell chips to them incentivizes further theft of intellectual property. If these two things are linked, this seems like a terrible strategy.
We shouldn't punish theft in a way where stealing now becomes their best option to survive.
a) The deal china made with US companies is bring us your technology and we will manufacture for you cheaply.
b) Giving technology as part of a deal and then retroactively calling it stealing is, well, strange.
c) America because what it was because it "stole" technology from Europe during the industrial revolution.
American companies understood what they were getting into and what the deals were and took them. China didn't force US companies to make those deals.
Most technological invention is paid for by the US government investment. Name any high technology and it's lineage points back to some government grant or purchase agreement.
Companies that use these inventions and innovate on top to bring them to market are themselves using technology we paid for. But we don't call that "stealing". Do you think they care that China also gets them?
Knowledge should be shared and free anyway.
A falsehood. The US was one of the primary innovators during the industrial revolution, along with Germany, Britain and France. In the oil/mining, steel, railroad/transport, electricity, building, manufacturing, automobile, farming and communication segments the US held its own when it came to invention in the 1870-1930 era. It doesn't take very long to canvas the major industrial segments and point to various large US contributions.
The recent claim that the US stole all of its industrial revolution era technology, is an empty defamation that you mostly only see on sites like Reddit as a propaganda angle, and it's always unsupported in argument.
[0] https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/chinese-telecommunications-co...
[1] https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/chinese-telecommunications-de...
Whatever happened to arresting Huawei’s Chief Financial Officer Wanzhou Meng? Was she ever extradited from Canada after being captured in Vancouver, BC?